Smoke/Heat detectors in elevator pits and at top of elevator shaft

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Schroeder

Member
Location
New Bedford, MA, USA
I’m in MA where the fire code does not permit sprinklers in the machine room, top of shaft or in the pit. I know that in other states where sprinkler heads are required in these spaces, heat detectors located in close proximity to the heads are required and that these are used to shunt trip power before the sprinklers go off (I think).

Smoke detector in the pit and at the top of shaft are not permitted nor are they good idea given the tendancy of dust to constantly be desturbed by the movement of the elevator cars.

Two questions: 1. - is all of the above accurate and 2. Even where I don’t need to put in heat detectors, may I add heat detectors at the top of the shaft and in the pit. Would could possibly be the down side to doing so?
 
Idk a false nuisance trip? Or if the pit or shaft is no heated/unconditioned you would have to check manufacturer specs to see if your temps fall in their limit
 
Schroeder said:
I’m in MA where the fire code does not permit sprinklers in the machine room, top of shaft or in the pit. I know that in other states where sprinkler heads are required in these spaces, heat detectors located in close proximity to the heads are required and that these are used to shunt trip power before the sprinklers go off (I think).

Smoke detector in the pit and at the top of shaft are not permitted nor are they good idea given the tendancy of dust to constantly be desturbed by the movement of the elevator cars.

Two questions: 1. - is all of the above accurate and 2. Even where I don’t need to put in heat detectors, may I add heat detectors at the top of the shaft and in the pit. Would could possibly be the down side to doing so?
Click to expand...
Regarding MA requirements, I don't know, but the rest of your reasoning is good. For some reason, NYMTA loves smoke detectors in elevator pits and that bad practice may have contaminated nearby jurisdictions as a shirt-pocket rule. Otherwise, don't put smoke detectors in the pit. You also aren't allowed to put them in the hoistway unless you also have heat detectors for running the shunt trip.

You could, as far as I know, put heat detectors at the top of shaft and in the pit if you want. I don't think anything prohibits that, at least as far as the national codes are concerned. Local amendments may say otherwise.
 
Requirements vary per location and adopted codes, and type of elevator, and if its sprinklered. So I hate to generalize.

However, I had a project where the inspector required a heat detector at the top of the shaft to be removed, since there wasn't a sprinkler.

He said it was to dangerous for the Fire Alarm people to get to it and test it.
 
steve66 said:
Requirements vary per location and adopted codes, and type of elevator, and if its sprinklered. So I hate to generalize.

However, I had a project where the inspector required a heat detector at the top of the shaft to be removed, since there wasn't a sprinkler.

He said it was to dangerous for the Fire Alarm people to get to it and test it.
Click to expand...
But somehow, if there was a sprinkler at the top of the shaft, it would be much safer to test and inspect a heat detector then?!? :rolleyes:
 
gadfly56 said:
Our techs ride the tops of cars all the time, usually when the elevator tech is on site. It isn't any more dangerous than using a man lift.
Click to expand...
Do they still have manlifts? I haven't seen one in years, and figured they were all removed long ago. But I don't do a lot of industrial.
 
steve66 said:
Do they still have manlifts? I haven't seen one in years, and figured they were all removed long ago. But I don't do a lot of industrial.
Click to expand...
Use these, or similar, all the time.

Big-Lifts-Lowered-View.jpg
 
gadfly56 said:
Use these, or similar, all the time.
Click to expand...
Oh, I thought you meant one of these:

1646770730965.pngI
They used to be common in tall industrial buildings. One I frequently rode would go about 3 stories above the closest platform.

But like I said, I haven't seen any of these in years.

Safe? I don't think so.
 
steve66 said:
Oh, I thought you meant one of these:

View attachment 2559761I
They used to be common in tall industrial buildings. One I frequently rode would go about 3 stories above the closest platform.

But like I said, I haven't seen any of these in years.

Safe? I don't think so.
Click to expand...
OK, that's not something I'd be comfortable on, let alone tell someone else to use. It looks like a continuous belt, up on one side and down on the other. Am I seeing this correctly?
 
gadfly56 said:
OK, that's not something I'd be comfortable on, let alone tell someone else to use. It looks like a continuous belt, up on one side and down on the other. Am I seeing this correctly?
Click to expand...
Yes, that's exactly what it was. You stand on a platform and hold on to the handhole. It doesn't stop - jump on and off while its moving.

Platforms and handholes are double sided - one side for up, and one for down.

And you don't want to forget to get off at the top or the bottom floor, although they do have safety stops.

Worst thing is the stories you hear about the things people try to carry on these - 5 gallon buckets of tools, stacks of boxes, sticks of conduit, etc.
 
Open Neutral said:
Generally called a "paternoster"
Click to expand...
I'd say those are quite a bit different, although they share the same general concept.

I don't think any of the paternoster's have been installed in the US - we have too many safety standards to let the general public use something like that. And they aren't exactly ADA.

Although the paternoster looks safer because its enclosed design keeps someone from falling 5 floors to their death, it looks like it would be much easier to loose a finger or a toe by getting it caught between the floor and the top of the opening.

All in all, I give both the paternoser and the humphry lift a meger 1 star safety rating.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top